Hello, Igniters. I extends IEP [1] with the tickets caused by H2 limitations.
Please, let's write down requirements for engine in the IEP. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-33%3A+New+SQL+executor+engine+infrastructure В Пн, 30/09/2019 в 17:20 -0700, Denis Magda пишет: > Ivan, we need more of these discussions, totally agree with you ;) > > I've updated the Motivation paragraph outlining some high-level users we > see by working with our users. Hope it helps. Let's carry on and let me > send a note to Apache Calcite community. > > - > Denis > > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 1:56 AM Ivan Pavlukhin <vololo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > Thanks everyone for a hot discussion! Not every open source community > > has such open and boiling discussions. It means that people here > > really do care. And I am proud of it! > > > > As I understood, nobody is strictly against the proposed initiative. > > And I am glad that we can move forward (with some steps back along the > > way). > > > > пт, 27 сент. 2019 г. в 19:29, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org>: > > > > > > Hello, Denis. > > > > > > Thanks for the clarifications. > > > > > > Sounds good for me. > > > All I try to say in this thread: > > > Guys, please, let's take a step back and write down requirements(what we > > > > want to get with SQL engine). > > > Which features and use-cases are primary for us. > > > > > > I'm sure you have done it, already during your research. > > > > > > Please, share it with the community. > > > > > > I'm pretty sure we would back to this document again and again during > > > > migration. > > > So good written design is worth it. > > > > > > В Пт, 27/09/2019 в 09:10 -0700, Denis Magda пишет: > > > > Ignite mates, let me try to move the discussion in a constructive way. > > > > It > > > > looks like we set a wrong context from the very beginning. > > > > > > > > Before proposing this idea to the community, some of us were > > > > discussing/researching the topic in different groups (the one need to > > > > think > > > > it through first before even suggesting to consider changes of this > > > > magnitude). The day has come to share this idea with the whole > > > > community > > > > and outline the next actions. But (!) nobody is 100% sure that that's > > > > the > > > > right decision. Thus, this will be an *experiment*, some of our > > > > community > > > > members will be developing a *prototype* and only based on the > > > > prototype > > > > outcomes we shall make a final decision. Igor, Roman, Ivan, Andrey, > > > > hope > > > > that nothing has changed and we're on the same page here. > > > > > > > > Many technical and architectural reasons that justify this project have > > > > been shared but let me throw in my perspective. There is nothing wrong > > > > with > > > > H2, that was the right choice for that time. Thanks to H2 and Ignite > > > > SQL > > > > APIs, our project is used across hundreds of deployments who are > > > > accelerating relational databases or use Ignite as a system of records. > > > > However, these days many more companies are migrating to *distributed* > > > > databases that speak SQL. For instance, if a couple of years ago 1 out > > > > of > > > > 10 use cases needed support for multi-joins queries or queries with > > > > subselects or efficient memory usage then today there are 5 out of 10 > > > > use > > > > cases of this kind; in the foreseeable future, it will be a 10 out of > > > > 10. > > > > So, the evolution is in progress -- the relational world goes > > > > distributed, > > > > it became exhaustive for both Ignite SQL maintainers and experts who > > > > help > > > > to tune it for production usage to keep pace with the evolution mostly > > > > due > > > > to the H2-dependency. Thus, Ignite SQL has to evolve and has to be > > > > ready to > > > > face the future reality. > > > > > > > > Luckily, we don't need to rush and don't have the right to rush because > > > > hundreds existing users have already trusted their production > > > > environments > > > > to Ignite SQL and we need to roll out changes with such a big impact > > > > carefully. So, I'm excited that Roman, Igor, Ivan, Andrey stepped in > > > > and > > > > agreed to be the first contributors who will be *experimenting* with > > > > the > > > > new SQL engine. Let's support them; let's connect them with Apache > > > > Calcite > > > > community and see how this story evolves. Folks, please keep the > > > > community > > > > aware of the progress, let us know when help is needed, some of us > > > > will be > > > > ready to support with development once you create a solid foundation > > > > for > > > > the prototype. > > > > > > > > - > > > > Denis > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 1:45 AM Igor Seliverstov < > > > > gvvinbl...@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Igniters! > > > > > > > > > > As you might know currently we have many open issues relating to > > > > current > > > > > H2 based engine and its execution flow. > > > > > > > > > > Some of them are critical (like impossibility to execute particular > > > > > queries), some of them are majors (like impossibility to execute > > > > particular > > > > > queries without pre-preparation your data to have a collocation) and > > > > many > > > > > minors. > > > > > > > > > > Most of the issues cannot be solved without whole engine redesign. > > > > > > > > > > So, here the proposal: > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=130028084 > > > > > > > > > > I'll appreciate if you share your thoughts on top of that. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Igor > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Ivan Pavlukhin > >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
